OCEAN SPRINGS, MS – On TV, the mayor is always the boss. From the cigar-chomping mayor of Jaws movies to Mayor Quimby on The Simpsons, pop culture has painted the mayor as the all-powerful figure at city hall — cutting deals, setting policy, and running the show.
But in Ocean Springs, that picture is pure fiction.
The city was reminded of this recently when aldermen were given a set of “guidelines” about how they should submit resolutions for meetings. The document gave the impression that the mayor’s staff and the city attorney might act as gatekeepers of the agenda, raising questions about how authority is supposed to flow in what’s called a weak-mayor government.
That phrase isn’t an insult. It’s the formal name for one of the systems Mississippi law allows cities to adopt. In a weak-mayor government, the mayor serves as the city’s executive officer, but the lawmaking power rests firmly with the board of aldermen. The mayor has limited legislative authority, able to break ties and issue vetoes, while the aldermen hold the full authority to pass ordinances, approve budgets, and decide policy.
By contrast, some larger cities operate under a strong-mayor system, where the mayor is both the chief executive and the chief policymaker. In those cities, the mayor typically has broad powers to hire and fire department heads, prepare the city budget, and even introduce legislation. Ocean Springs does not follow that model. Its mayor’s role is intentionally narrower, with most powers resting in the hands of the board.
Separation of Powers: Who Makes the Laws, Who Runs City Hall
Ocean Springs follows this weak-mayor model, also known as the code charter form of government. Power is divided into two branches:
- The Board of Aldermen – The Legislative Branch
The seven aldermen (six by ward, plus one at-large) are the city’s lawmakers. They pass ordinances, adopt budgets, approve contracts, and decide the city’s priorities. They also control personnel decisions. Hiring and firing city employees — from department heads down to staff — is done by a vote of the board, not by the mayor acting alone. - The Mayor – The Executive Branch
The mayor serves as the city’s chief executive officer. His job is to carry out the board’s decisions, supervise employees once they’re hired, and make sure ordinances are enforced. He presides over board meetings, but he doesn’t control what the board debates or decides.
The law gives the mayor only two narrow ways to affect legislation:
- Breaking a tie if the board deadlocks.
- Vetoing a decision, although just five aldermen can override that veto.
That’s the full extent of the mayor’s legislative power.
The myth of the all-powerful mayor hasn’t come out of nowhere. Even some past city officials have referred to themselves as part of the “mayor’s administration,” as though aldermen were subordinates. In reality, aldermen are independent representatives of their wards, not cabinet members serving under the mayor.
The Agenda Tug-of-War
The lines blurred again this summer, when aldermen were issued a set of “guidelines” on how to add resolutions to the agenda. The document seemed to place the mayor’s staff and the city attorney in the role of approving what could move forward.
Even if that was not the intent, guidelines like these can fuel the perception that unelected employees or advisors decide what the elected board is allowed to debate. In a weak-mayor system, that’s not how it’s meant to work. Staff are there to manage logistics, and the attorney’s role is to advise, while the legislative power rests with the board.
Situations like this can lead to a kind of circular problem. By law, the board sets its own agenda. But in practice, aldermen often must submit items through the clerk’s office.
If an item doesn’t appear, aldermen may feel compelled to push for its inclusion, only to be told they can’t order staff around. The result is a tug-of-war that leaves both sides frustrated. This turf battle could be alleviated with firm local policies created by the aldermen.
When Staff Step Into the Debate
Another place confusion can creep in is during board debate itself. In a weak-mayor system, deliberation is supposed to be among the aldermen, the elected lawmakers. Staff and advisors are present to answer questions when asked, but not to steer the discussion.
Yet it’s easy to imagine how this line could get crossed. If staff begin interjecting in the middle of aldermen’s debate, offering opinions or redirecting conversation, it can blur the roles of who is elected to decide policy and who is hired to carry it out.
The fix isn’t complicated. Most of these problems can be solved through clear procedures, such as those found in Robert’s Rules of Order. The board already has the power to adopt its own policies to govern how meetings are run.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the aldermen. If they want city government to operate the way the law intends, they must stake their claim by adopting procedures that reinforce their authority. When they don’t, the vacuum tends to get filled — sometimes by “mystery guidelines,” sometimes by staff improvisation, and sometimes by the city attorney.
Who the City Attorney Really Serves
The city attorney plays a central role in how meetings run, but it’s important to remember what that role is and what it isn’t. Under Mississippi law, the attorney represents the governing authorities as a whole — the mayor and the board together.
The purpose is to provide legal advice: helping draft ordinances so they are enforceable, reviewing contracts to keep the city out of trouble, and guiding aldermen on how to carry out their ideas within the law. What the attorney is not supposed to do is act like a policymaker.
In Ocean Springs, recent past attorneys have even slipped up in meetings by saying “I’d like to make a motion,” before quickly correcting themselves with, “I’d like for an alderman to make a motion.” Those Freudian slips are telling — the attorney is not an “eighth alderman.”
If aldermen want to keep that boundary clear, they can adopt written guidelines clarifying that the city attorney’s role is to advise, not to legislate. Regular reviews by the board can help ensure the position stays focused on legal counsel, not political direction.
Why It Matters
When residents assume the mayor is in charge, accountability gets misplaced. When staff or attorneys are seen as gatekeepers, accountability gets blurred. The aldermen make the laws, control the money, and even decide who works for the city.
The mayor enforces those decisions and represents Ocean Springs, but his legislative powers are limited to breaking ties and issuing vetoes that five aldermen can override. The city attorney is there to advise both sides, not to control either.
Understanding this balance helps keep responsibility where it belongs — with the elected officials chosen by voters.
An Alderman’s Concerns
Ward 4 Alderman Shannon Grace Pfeiffer recently highlighted this very issue in a Facebook post, calling for a Parliamentary Procedure Workshop. The idea, she wrote, would “guide us through our city charter, bylaws, governing documents, and the Mississippi Code that define our roles and responsibilities.” It would also help the board “set a clear plan for how we choose to govern as a full Board so that the people you elected are the ones setting the rules, writing legislation, and making the decisions on your behalf.”
Pfeiffer didn’t shy away from why this matters now. “Mystery guidelines have appeared in aldermen’s boxes without Board approval. Aldermen have been told we cannot sponsor our own legislation, which is not how representative government works. Staff, rather than the Board, have at times tried to define elected officials’ responsibilities. And most concerning, there have been discussions and votes held in executive session that don’t meet the legal criteria.”
With five new aldermen and a mayor who previously served as alderman-at-large, Pfeiffer argued, this is the moment to get everyone on the same page. “This group of eight individuals, each with their own mind, has never worked together before… it’s about understanding our duties and responsibilities as defined by law, and making sure this new group of elected officials sets the course together.”
Her bottom line was simple: “At the end of the day, your elected officials, not unelected staff, are responsible to you. A workshop like this would give us the tools, knowledge, and shared understanding to do that job the right way.”
Back to the Movies
So the next time someone imagines Ocean Springs being run like a scene out of The Simpsons or Jaws, it’s worth remembering: that’s Hollywood, not City Hall. Here, aldermen are the lawmakers, the mayor is the administrator, and the city attorney is meant to be the guide, not the star of the show.
It may not make for blockbuster television, but it is how the law says Ocean Springs really works.
